So far, the Liberal minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services has avoided most of the collateral damage that the 10-month strike by more than 3,000 United Steelworkers at Vale Inco could cause him, but he's about to be outed.

Frustrated Steelworkers at Local 6500 in Sudbury and Local 6200 in Port Colborne are demanding the province enact legislation banning replacement workers. Vale Inco has hired hundreds of replacement workers to run some of its Sudbury operations since the fall. The union says this is prolonging a bitter strike.

The province has shown no inclination to consider this. Even if it did, such sweeping legislation should not be aimed at a particular strike. Any debate must include the effect on the overall business climate, which is more than just the length and number of strikes.

But Bartolucci's sensitivity to criticism in his riding about the issue has shown itself in his changing position. In October, as Steelworkers gathered at his constituency office, he insisted he had to remain neutral in the dispute, citing the Integrity Act. This didn't sit well with Steelworkers, who recalled his support for such legislation when he wasThe Minister of Outragein opposition and the Progressive Conservatives were in power.

In October, Bartolucci said he knew his neutrality would not be popular "for some of you ... and I'm not going to apologize for that.

"I honestly believe it is the best position for me to take," he said at the time. "I can refer to the Integrity Act, Section 4, where it says I shouldn't take a position. It is the position I will continue to establish or maintain, because I think that's the position that will hopefully bring both sides back to the table."

Fast forward to this month, as the pressure mounted on Bartolucci, his song didn't remain the same. Instead, a release from his office said, "Mr. Bartolucci has and will continue to oppose the use of replacement workers." In fact, he said he's held that position since 1996.

So much for the Integrity Act.

But how does Bartolucci oppose the use of replacement workers? He didn't show up at city council to support its motion supporting a ban. He said it's up to the Labour Ministry to consider such legislation. He hasn't asked a question of Labour Minister Peter Fonseca in the legislature about any such legislation.

He has missed two votes on NDP private member's bills on a ban on replacement workers.

Ontario had such a ban under the NDP government in the early 1990s during a recession, but it was rescinded by the succeeding Tory government.

Quebec and British Columbia ban replacement workers, but neither province's economies are models of economic security.

Bartolucci knows his government is not going to go down that road, so he apparently feels he's free to voice is support, once again, for a ban on replacement workers.

But a movement now afoot by organized labour in Sudbury is about to test his resolve in the issue.